使用阻抗平面测量法(EndoFLIP)确定食管运动障碍的理想扩张范围。

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Surgery Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-05 DOI:10.1016/j.surg.2024.08.030
Jean-Christophe N Rwigema, Kristine Kuchta, Derrius J Anderson, Stephanie Joseph, Trevor Crafts, Shun Ishii, H Mason Hedberg, Michael B Ujiki
{"title":"使用阻抗平面测量法(EndoFLIP)确定食管运动障碍的理想扩张范围。","authors":"Jean-Christophe N Rwigema, Kristine Kuchta, Derrius J Anderson, Stephanie Joseph, Trevor Crafts, Shun Ishii, H Mason Hedberg, Michael B Ujiki","doi":"10.1016/j.surg.2024.08.030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Use of impedance planimetry (EndoFLIP) has shown distensibility index ranges associated with improved patient-reported outcomes after antireflux surgery. Questions remain whether the previously described ideal distensibility index range can be used for patients with esophageal motility disorders. We hypothesized that patients with esophageal motility disorders would have a different ideal distensibility range for optimal outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained gastroesophageal database was performed for all patients undergoing Toupet and Nissen fundoplication and impedance planimetry. Demographic data, perioperative outcomes, and quality-of-life indicators (Reflux Symptom Index, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, and gas/bloat and dysphagia scores) were analyzed and compared between patients by use of the χ<sup>2</sup> and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 2015 to 2024, 475 patients underwent laparoscopic fundoplication and impedance planimetry evaluation. Of those, 160 had a final distensibility index score in the ideal range, 165 with a final distensibility index score <2.5, and 150 with a final distensibility index >3.6. In the ideal-range cohort, there were no statistically significant differences between those with normal and abnormal motility in regards to outcomes or quality of life indicators. In the low distensibility index cohort, patients with abnormal motility had worse Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, gas/bloat, and dysphagia scores at 1 year postoperatively compared with those with normal motility. More patients in the low distensibility index cohort required dilations postoperatively, and more patients in the high distensibility index cohort had recurrences compared with those in the ideal range cohort.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The previously described ideal distensibility index range of 2.5-3.6 for patients undergoing laparoscopic fundoplication may be used for patients with certain esophageal motility disorders.</p>","PeriodicalId":22152,"journal":{"name":"Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"108803"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using impedance planimetry (EndoFLIP) to determine ideal distensibility ranges for esophageal motility disorders.\",\"authors\":\"Jean-Christophe N Rwigema, Kristine Kuchta, Derrius J Anderson, Stephanie Joseph, Trevor Crafts, Shun Ishii, H Mason Hedberg, Michael B Ujiki\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.surg.2024.08.030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Use of impedance planimetry (EndoFLIP) has shown distensibility index ranges associated with improved patient-reported outcomes after antireflux surgery. Questions remain whether the previously described ideal distensibility index range can be used for patients with esophageal motility disorders. We hypothesized that patients with esophageal motility disorders would have a different ideal distensibility range for optimal outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained gastroesophageal database was performed for all patients undergoing Toupet and Nissen fundoplication and impedance planimetry. Demographic data, perioperative outcomes, and quality-of-life indicators (Reflux Symptom Index, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, and gas/bloat and dysphagia scores) were analyzed and compared between patients by use of the χ<sup>2</sup> and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 2015 to 2024, 475 patients underwent laparoscopic fundoplication and impedance planimetry evaluation. Of those, 160 had a final distensibility index score in the ideal range, 165 with a final distensibility index score <2.5, and 150 with a final distensibility index >3.6. In the ideal-range cohort, there were no statistically significant differences between those with normal and abnormal motility in regards to outcomes or quality of life indicators. In the low distensibility index cohort, patients with abnormal motility had worse Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, gas/bloat, and dysphagia scores at 1 year postoperatively compared with those with normal motility. More patients in the low distensibility index cohort required dilations postoperatively, and more patients in the high distensibility index cohort had recurrences compared with those in the ideal range cohort.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The previously described ideal distensibility index range of 2.5-3.6 for patients undergoing laparoscopic fundoplication may be used for patients with certain esophageal motility disorders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"108803\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2024.08.030\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2024.08.030","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:阻抗平面测量法(EndoFLIP)的使用表明,胀气指数范围与改善患者报告的抗反流手术后疗效相关。之前描述的理想胀气指数范围是否适用于食管运动障碍患者仍存在疑问。我们假设食管运动障碍患者会有不同的理想伸张度范围,以获得最佳疗效:我们对所有接受 Toupet 和 Nissen 胃底折叠术及阻抗平面测量的患者进行了回顾性分析。通过χ2检验和Wilcoxon秩和检验对患者的人口统计学数据、围手术期结果和生活质量指标(反流症状指数、胃食管反流病-健康相关生活质量问卷、胃气/胃胀和吞咽困难评分)进行分析和比较:2015年至2024年,475名患者接受了腹腔镜胃底折叠术和阻抗平面测量评估。其中,160 人的最终胀气指数得分在理想范围内,165 人的最终胀气指数得分为 3.6。在理想范围组群中,运动正常和异常的患者在治疗效果或生活质量指标方面没有显著的统计学差异。在低舒张指数组群中,与运动正常的患者相比,运动异常的患者在术后一年的胃食管反流病-健康相关生活质量问卷、胃气/胃胀和吞咽困难评分更差。与理想范围队列相比,低胀气指数队列中有更多患者术后需要扩张,而高胀气指数队列中有更多患者复发:结论:之前描述的腹腔镜胃底折叠术患者的理想胀气指数范围为 2.5-3.6,可用于某些食管运动障碍患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Using impedance planimetry (EndoFLIP) to determine ideal distensibility ranges for esophageal motility disorders.

Objective: Use of impedance planimetry (EndoFLIP) has shown distensibility index ranges associated with improved patient-reported outcomes after antireflux surgery. Questions remain whether the previously described ideal distensibility index range can be used for patients with esophageal motility disorders. We hypothesized that patients with esophageal motility disorders would have a different ideal distensibility range for optimal outcomes.

Methods: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained gastroesophageal database was performed for all patients undergoing Toupet and Nissen fundoplication and impedance planimetry. Demographic data, perioperative outcomes, and quality-of-life indicators (Reflux Symptom Index, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, and gas/bloat and dysphagia scores) were analyzed and compared between patients by use of the χ2 and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.

Results: From 2015 to 2024, 475 patients underwent laparoscopic fundoplication and impedance planimetry evaluation. Of those, 160 had a final distensibility index score in the ideal range, 165 with a final distensibility index score <2.5, and 150 with a final distensibility index >3.6. In the ideal-range cohort, there were no statistically significant differences between those with normal and abnormal motility in regards to outcomes or quality of life indicators. In the low distensibility index cohort, patients with abnormal motility had worse Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, gas/bloat, and dysphagia scores at 1 year postoperatively compared with those with normal motility. More patients in the low distensibility index cohort required dilations postoperatively, and more patients in the high distensibility index cohort had recurrences compared with those in the ideal range cohort.

Conclusion: The previously described ideal distensibility index range of 2.5-3.6 for patients undergoing laparoscopic fundoplication may be used for patients with certain esophageal motility disorders.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Surgery
Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
687
审稿时长
64 days
期刊介绍: For 66 years, Surgery has published practical, authoritative information about procedures, clinical advances, and major trends shaping general surgery. Each issue features original scientific contributions and clinical reports. Peer-reviewed articles cover topics in oncology, trauma, gastrointestinal, vascular, and transplantation surgery. The journal also publishes papers from the meetings of its sponsoring societies, the Society of University Surgeons, the Central Surgical Association, and the American Association of Endocrine Surgeons.
期刊最新文献
Discussion. Discussion. Discussion. Discussion. Discussion.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1